"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.co.uk...
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 19:06:22 +0100, harryagain wrote:

There's tidal power aplenty in the UK.

Where? Show me the tidal power stations within the territorial area
of the UK. What is their total and mean capacity?

I can't believe you are so thick.
The power is there, it has not been exploited.
Open an atlas,
Ever river estuary you see.

"The Other Mike" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 20:43:07 +0100, Johny B Good
wrote:

On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 12:32:39 +0100, The Other Mike
wrote:

Domestic Micro CHP, if rolled out on a large scale would quite likely
reduce
electricity demand off peak altering the loading deloading profile such
that
generating costs by 'big gen' stand a big chance of being increased due
to less
run time and lower loading.

Wrong! Domestic micro chp will help smooth out demand by reducing the
peaks which necessitate turning on the "Big Tap" at the Ffestiniog and
Dinorwig PSP facilities which the National Grid have to pay for at
premium rates.

The peak of heating demand rarely coincides with the peak of electricity
demand
and thus every single design of micro chp will need to dump a very large
proportion of that waste heat into something. This time of year it isn't
wanted
at all for space heating and hot water demand is for all practical
purposes SFA.
Alternatively it could be just ****ed away at a worse efficiency than the
worst
OCGT plant.

Take a typical boiler in a typical 3 bed 90's built house, lets be
generous and
say it's 25kW output. Now replace like for like with the very best micro
chp.
Assume 20% of that output is available for local electricity generation.

Firing up a million of these gives us 5GW.

The true capital cost of that generation (fully accounting for the
subsidies) is
somewhere around £10000 per home, or around 10 billion for 5GW of
generation and
with the fuel supply at 'retail' prices. Whereas CCGT generation
currently
costs around 600 million per GW, gas at wholesale, giving incentives for
financiers to build and make a return on capital, and with lots of
potential for
use of the 'waste' heat that is already exploited at a number of UK sites.
There is also potential for carbon capture on a mass scale that is simply
not a
practical proposition 'in the home' or even at the office block commercial
CHP
level.

So that is 3 billion capital cost for centralised generation, or 10
billion for
'the alternative' What advantages does distributed generation really
offer? In
a word. None.

As for LFTR's, they might have their place at some point in the distant
future
but forget it for now. Come back in say 30 years with a proven design not
some
pie in the sky non proven, non certified design. Till then better energy
efficiency both in homes, commerce and industry, significantly less
reliance on
imported gas and in the 10 -15 year timeframe PWR/ BWR's are the only
realistic
way to go with vast uncertainties about the yields from UK fracking. In
the
meantime coal generation, the kind that is closing right left and centre
all
over the UK is well proven, reliable, with a very stable low cost source
of fuel
from Australia and the USA.

1GW of UK coal generation has been lost in the past three months, not
replaced
by anything. Shut down by the LCPD, legislated by the ****wits in
Brussels,
dictating what we should do in our own ****ing country to save the sodding
planet and fund a climate scientist so they can breed.

Removal of FIT payments for wind and solar would, at a stroke, go part way
to
incentivise real investment in properly engineered, long lasting (40+ year
plant
life) very high availability despatchable generating solutions, not some
half
baked willy waving FoE/Greenpeace/EU save the planet/panda/bunnies ****wit
ideas
that are neither practical nor scaleable.

It's way too late now and the anticipated supply problems in the coming
winter
show this all too clearly. This country desperately needs security of
supply, so
that means no wind or solar or FIT payments, and security of fuel sources,
as we
lost the ability to mine our own coal and shoot the miners if need be to
encourage them back to work. So we have to go for coal and uranium supply
from
friendly nations like Australia and not gas or coal from the Russian Mafia
or
gas from a really dodgy geezer driving an uninsured Zonda round London
dressed
in a white sheet and a tea towel.

P.S. The cost of pumped storage generation is *wholly irrelevant* to this
discussion. The use of pumped storage is not purely for the peaks as
commonly
touted in the media it's a damn sight more complex than that, and
massively
overpriced distributed small scale generation no matter how 'smart'
*cannot*
replace it and must not be permitted to attempt to replace it by
politicians and
green ****wits interfering in things they inherently do not understand.

So our mike is riht and every other nation is wrong?

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 06:16:25 +0100, harryagain wrote:

There's tidal power aplenty in the UK.

Where? Show me the tidal power stations within the territorial
area
of the UK. What is their total and mean capacity?

I can't believe you are so thick.

Pot kettle balck.

The power is there, it has not been exploited.

That is not what you wrote.

Ever river estuary you see.

And you try an build a tidal scheme on one of them let alone and all
your greenie mates will be down on you with tens of tonnes of bricks,
so go stand in an estuary.

Look how long there have been thoughts, quite detailed plans and
prelimary survey work carried out only for the greens to block it.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 26/06/2014 08:41, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 06:16:25 +0100, harryagain wrote:

There's tidal power aplenty in the UK.

Where? Show me the tidal power stations within the territorial
area
of the UK. What is their total and mean capacity?

I can't believe you are so thick.

Pot kettle balck.

The power is there, it has not been exploited.

That is not what you wrote.

Ever river estuary you see.

And you try an build a tidal scheme on one of them let alone and all
your greenie mates will be down on you with tens of tonnes of bricks,
so go stand in an estuary.

Look how long there have been thoughts, quite detailed plans and
prelimary survey work carried out only for the greens to block it.


Well those greens know something about what will happen if you let the
harry greens dam the estuary.
Not all greens are the same shade.

In article , harryagain
scribeth thus

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...

This now reads like the ravings of a deranged mind. Hint: we can all
see your 'thoughts', this fantasy isn't private anymore. It's as if
you were thinking out loud but forgot to stop typing.

It makes you look like a young child throwing a tantrum on being
confronted for the first time in its life with the reality of
injustice. I do feel for you, Buddy, but for me and most adults, it's
really, realy 'Old News'. Get over it!

[1] http://thoriummsr.com/category/lftr/

for more interesting _reading_, try this link:

http://thoriummsr.com/category/lftr/page/6/

You are easily taken in by cheap propaganda.
All these people are gonna be out of a job pretty soon.
They are deperate to get their snoutsback in the trough.



In the meantime your spouting out of date bollix and thus far have not
suggested a practical alternative source/s of power that will be
workable on the scale required...

--
Tony Sayer

There's tidal power aplenty in the UK.
And still plenty of room for efficiency.



Of course Harry, Of course. Now lets just see, build a large dam all
around the UK, well thats if Scotland what to join in and flood the
whole country then there just might be enough power.

Hold on !, I did say practicable workable solutions so perhaps not..

Next?...
--
Tony Sayer